“In May, Burgess pleaded guilty to a felony charge of removing or concealing human skeletal remains.”
If that is the case, people are a lot stranger then I thought. I thought not hiding and/or stealing human remains was something most people supported. Learned another new thing today
I wonder if the circumstances leading up to that have any bearing on what ultimately happened, and if the state’s draconian laws on women’s rights should be examined as a possible influence on these chain of events. No, you’re right, the entire thing happened entirely in a bubble, context be damned.
My understanding is that the law for abortion was 20 weeks at the time. That was more inline with European standards.
Regardless, you cannot just hide the remains. If that were legal bad clinics would be in there right to dump remains.
Either way you seem to be making a lot of assumptions. If you have links about this case that have more context of the situation I would be happy to read them.
I am a -1.5 by - 4.21 on the political compass if that makes you feel superior.
If she wasn’t able to access abortion healthcare prior to 20 weeks and as a result had the abortion performed at 28 weeks, which I’m sure she was aware at the time was against Nebraska law, then it’s not really a surprise that she would try to conceal the remains to cover up her original crime, which I would argue shouldn’t be a crime to begin with. Think about it critically here. Do you think laws against hiding human remains exist because hiding human remains is in and of itself a bad thing, or do they exist because someone hiding human remains suggests that they likely committed another crime prior to it? In which case we should be examining the circumstances leading up to the remains being hidden to begin with and apply judgement based on the entire circumstances.
Either way you seem to be making a lot of assumptions
“Context matters” is an assumption? We don’t know the full context, but here you are assuming she’s a bad person.
I am a -1.5 by - 4.21 on the political compass
Who cares. The political compass is a fucking joke that nobody should be taking seriously.
You made the assumption that she could not receive abortion healthcare in the allowed 20 weeks at the time. I do not want to form my opinion on an assumption or feeling. I am going by what the article state since no one else has provided links to additional information on this case.
She was sentenced for the crime she admitted guilt to. Seems fair from the information I have.
You arguments may hold up better in the case of the mother when her sentencing come up.
“Who cares. The political compass is a fucking joke that nobody should be taking seriously.”
You appear to as you try to throw ideas that challenge you into buckets when you say “Sure is easy being a conservative, isn’t it?”
You made the assumption that she could not receive abortion healthcare in the allowed 20 weeks at the time.
I didn’t assume anything. I have made a theory based on the facts presented to me, but I have not asserted my theory as fact. Learn the difference between theories and assumptions, please.
Seems fair from the information I have.
That is an opinion formed from your feelings. It’s okay to form opinions, just don’t act like you’re better than everyone else because you’re pretending you aren’t doing so.
You appear to as you try to throw ideas that challenge you into buckets when you say “Sure is easy being a conservative, isn’t it?”
That had jack shit to do with the political compass and everything to do with you choosing to ignore everything that users in this thread were saying and assuming that the only moral judgement being made was on this woman hiding human remains, and ignoring all conversation to the contrary, when in reality the story is much more nuanced and complex than that. Boiling down a complex event to “person did a bad thing, therefore they are wrong in everything” and dismissing the rest of the story so you can make a moral judgement is something conservatives are fond of. Maybe don’t act like a conservative if you don’t want to be called one.
Just because people disagree with you doesn’t mean they didn’t read the article. You don’t need to keep fucking spamming this everywhere.
“In May, Burgess pleaded guilty to a felony charge of removing or concealing human skeletal remains.”
If that is the case, people are a lot stranger then I thought. I thought not hiding and/or stealing human remains was something most people supported. Learned another new thing today
I wonder if the circumstances leading up to that have any bearing on what ultimately happened, and if the state’s draconian laws on women’s rights should be examined as a possible influence on these chain of events. No, you’re right, the entire thing happened entirely in a bubble, context be damned.
Sure is easy being a conservative, isn’t it?
My understanding is that the law for abortion was 20 weeks at the time. That was more inline with European standards.
Regardless, you cannot just hide the remains. If that were legal bad clinics would be in there right to dump remains.
Either way you seem to be making a lot of assumptions. If you have links about this case that have more context of the situation I would be happy to read them.
I am a -1.5 by - 4.21 on the political compass if that makes you feel superior.
If she wasn’t able to access abortion healthcare prior to 20 weeks and as a result had the abortion performed at 28 weeks, which I’m sure she was aware at the time was against Nebraska law, then it’s not really a surprise that she would try to conceal the remains to cover up her original crime, which I would argue shouldn’t be a crime to begin with. Think about it critically here. Do you think laws against hiding human remains exist because hiding human remains is in and of itself a bad thing, or do they exist because someone hiding human remains suggests that they likely committed another crime prior to it? In which case we should be examining the circumstances leading up to the remains being hidden to begin with and apply judgement based on the entire circumstances.
“Context matters” is an assumption? We don’t know the full context, but here you are assuming she’s a bad person.
Who cares. The political compass is a fucking joke that nobody should be taking seriously.
You made the assumption that she could not receive abortion healthcare in the allowed 20 weeks at the time. I do not want to form my opinion on an assumption or feeling. I am going by what the article state since no one else has provided links to additional information on this case.
She was sentenced for the crime she admitted guilt to. Seems fair from the information I have.
You arguments may hold up better in the case of the mother when her sentencing come up.
“Who cares. The political compass is a fucking joke that nobody should be taking seriously.”
You appear to as you try to throw ideas that challenge you into buckets when you say “Sure is easy being a conservative, isn’t it?”
I didn’t assume anything. I have made a theory based on the facts presented to me, but I have not asserted my theory as fact. Learn the difference between theories and assumptions, please.
That is an opinion formed from your feelings. It’s okay to form opinions, just don’t act like you’re better than everyone else because you’re pretending you aren’t doing so.
That had jack shit to do with the political compass and everything to do with you choosing to ignore everything that users in this thread were saying and assuming that the only moral judgement being made was on this woman hiding human remains, and ignoring all conversation to the contrary, when in reality the story is much more nuanced and complex than that. Boiling down a complex event to “person did a bad thing, therefore they are wrong in everything” and dismissing the rest of the story so you can make a moral judgement is something conservatives are fond of. Maybe don’t act like a conservative if you don’t want to be called one.
Removed by mod